It's not fun to be in Marian Hossa's shoes where you're high stick caused the end of someone's career, it can have a traumatic effect on how you go on in life. If a simple rule can cut down on those situations I don't see the big deal about it.

I support visors because vital body function, namely vision. But I think talking about psychological trauma caused caused to a third party is taking this way too far. In my opinion most of that "pain and suffering" stuff your hear about in court verdicts is plain garbage.

With the blatant disregard some players show in the use of their use of their sticks, coupled with the blatant inability of some on-ice officials to make the proper call regarding these violations, why wouldn't players want to have a little more in the way of protection?

"If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!" - Kierkegaard

I've did a little maintenance work in some Walmarts. I could be hanging a door or painting a wall, fairly low risk work but it is mandatory to wear gloves, steel toed boots, long sleeved shirt, hard hat, high viz vest and eye protection.
I don't have 6'3" 200lb men coming at me with sticks but its designed to help me go home in the same nick I left the house in the morning.
It's about changing attitudes, it's unacceptable for people to get seriously hurt in a life changing way in the workplace.
Used to be people wouldn't wear their high viz, now you can't get people to take them off. Give the visor rule time, if it helps one guy to be able to see his grand kids and tell them what it was like to be a Wing without being blind in one eye or have a scared face from an errant stick is that not worth it?
It's not about dressing like a 9th century Knight, it's about protecting bits of the anatomy that don't get better with rest and recouperation.

The vision increase is not that significant, and easily adapted to. It's one thing to ask players that have played without one their whole career to suddenly wear one, it's quite another to keep making younger players wear it. The risk/reward is so evident, that's what makes it tough for a lot of people to understand why people are against visors.

The vision increase is not that significant, and easily adapted to. It's one thing to ask players that have played without one their whole career to suddenly wear one, it's quite another to keep making younger players wear it. The risk/reward is so evident, that's what makes it tough for a lot of people to understand why people are against visors.

because we are talking about perfectly trained adults here, they are the players and I would guess that they now exactly what is best for them and what is not.

because we are talking about perfectly trained adults here, they are the players and I would guess that they now exactly what is best for them and what is not.

This is just like people saying that they want a no helmet law when it comes to riding a motorcycle. These perfectly intelligent and trained adults know the risks. So there should a no helmet law right? If someone gets into an accident and has a head injury which puts them in a care facility for the rest of their lives, they will be going after the insurance company, the driver, the state, and everyone else they can get money from.

The problem is that these hockey players are going to be fine with it until one of them takes a stick to the eye and then their career comes to an abrupt end. Like Manny Malhotra who has played in 9 games since his eye injury and it looks like his career is finished. He is going to get as much from NHL disability as he can.

There are times when people must be protected from themselves. Just like people should be forced to wear a helmet when they ride a motorcycle, players should be told to wear visors. They aren't growing eyeballs in petri dishes, and all it takes is one stick to end your career. I think that visors, like helmets in the past, should be grandfathered in.

This is just like people saying that they want a no helmet law when it comes to riding a motorcycle. These perfectly intelligent and trained adults know the risks. So there should a no helmet law right? If someone gets into an accident and has a head injury which puts them in a care facility for the rest of their lives, they will be going after the insurance company, the driver, the state, and everyone else they can get money from.

The problem is that these hockey players are going to be fine with it until one of them takes a stick to the eye and then their career comes to an abrupt end. Like Manny Malhotra who has played in 9 games since his eye injury and it looks like his career is finished. He is going to get as much from NHL disability as he can.

There are times when people must be protected from themselves. Just like people should be forced to wear a helmet when they ride a motorcycle, players should be told to wear visors. They aren't growing eyeballs in petri dishes, and all it takes is one stick to end your career. I think that visors, like helmets in the past, should be grandfathered in.